20171590 Ver 2_401 Application_20191024

WETLANDS
„14, Y& WATERS, INC
Mr. Bryan Roden -Reynolds
US Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
c/o Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Ave. Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
RE: Nationwide Permit 29 Verification
Planter's Walk
Davidson County
SAW-2006-40393-229, DWR# 2017-1590
Mr. Roden -Reynolds and Ms. Homewood,
RECEIVED/DENR/DWR
OCT 2 4 2019
Water Resources
Permitting Section
Ms. Sue Homewood
Ap
October , 280
�'
Division of Water Resources
Winston Salem Regional Office
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd. Suite 300
Winston Salem, NC 27105
Attached please find a Pre -Construction Notification for a Nationwide Permit 29 Verification for impacts
associated with a proposed residential development on the subject property, referred to as Planter's
Walk. The site is located on Paul Pope Road in Davidson County, North Carolina. Impacts associated with
this request include 147 linear feet of new, permanent impacts to jurisdictional non -wetland Waters of
the US and 0.046 acres of new, permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands Waters of the US.
Previously authorized impacts associated with this project include 52 linear feet of permanent impacts
to non -wetland Waters of the US and 0.096 acres of permanent impacts to wetlands Waters of the US.
We are also requesting a 401 WQC from NC DWR for the above referenced impacts. A site visit was
conducted by yourselves and W&W staff on 01/31/18. The revised approximate depiction of aquatic
resources based upon the results of this site visit is included with this notification.
Project Purpose and Need
The purpose of the proposed project is to continue construction of a residential subdivision to meet the
growing demand for housing within the region and to fulfill the economic expectations of the existing
and on -going project.
Proiect Description
The proposed project consists of the proposed development, appurtenant parking and infrastructure,
connection to an existing on -site sanitary sewer system, and connection to Joe Moore Road. New
impacts include 147 linear feet of permanent impacts to jurisdictional tributaries and 0.046 acres of
permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands, which are necessary for two road crossings in order to
access high ground and to meet connectivity requirements per local ordinance. The site will be
constructed under an approved sediment and erosion control plan in order to minimize risk of materials
incidental to construction activities being transported into downstream receiving waters.
Avoidance and Minimization
The project has been carefully designed to minimize impacts to aquatic resources to the maximum
extent practicable. Headwalls as well as riprap dissipators will be utilized on both the upstream and
Christopher Huysman WETLANDS & WATERS, INC. Tamp Bandy
170 Dew Drop Road 4108 LB Propst Drive
Sparta, NC 28675 Conover, NC 28613
336.406.0906 828.302.3437
[e-mail] [e-mail]

downstream portions of both proposed road crossings in order minimize stream disturbance. The first
crossing location has been co -located in a portion of the tributary that contains 24 feet of an existing 24"
culvert crossing in order to minimize disturbance. Temporary impacts for pump -around will be located
within the proposed riprap dissipator areas such that work can be conducted in the dry.
Compensatory Mitigation
In order to mitigate for unavoidable losses, the applicant proposes to provide compensatory mitigation
in the form of credit purchase from the DMS In -Lieu Fee program. The acceptance letter from DMS is
provided with this request. The applicant proposes the following mitigation ratios to corresponding
impacts:
• Based upon an NC SAM evaluation of Tributary 4 and a Medium rating for USACE/AII streams,
the applicant proposes a 1.5:1 mitigation ratio for the new culvert impacts only, totaling 77
linear feet (Impacts S2 & S3). As the existing 24 linear feet of culvert is assumed to be previously
authorized under NWP 26, mitigation is not proposed for this impact.
• New impacts to Tributary 5 (Impact S5) for the culvert crossing are proposed at a 2:1 mitigation
ratio.
• As the riprap energy dissipators will be pressed into the stream bed at existing elevation in order
to maintain aquatic life passage, compensatory mitigation is not proposed for riprap impacts
(Impacts S1, S4 & S6).
• As the new impacts (0.046 acres) to jurisdictional wetlands are considered forested,
compensatory mitigation at a 2:1 ratio is proposed for these impacts.
• All previously authorized and completed impacts (0.096 acres of wetlands and 52 LF of tributary)
are proposed at a 1:1 mitigation ratio, as this was the commonly accepted ratio at the time of
authorization.
Attached documentation to support this request is as follows:
1.
Pre -Construction Notification
2.
New Impact Exhibits and Previous Impact Exhibit
3.
Division of Mitigation Services Acceptance Letter
4.
NC Stream Assessment Method (SAM) Evaluation
5.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Report
6.
NC Wildlife Resources Commission Comment Letter
7. Revised Approximate Depiction of Aquatic Resources and Resource maps
8. Site photographs
Please do not hesitate to reply if you have any questions or require further information to process this
request.
Best regards,
Perry Isner
704.773.4239
CHRISTOPHER HUYSMAN WETLANDS & WATERS, INC. TAMP BANDY
1 70 DEW DROP ROAD 41 08 LB PROPST DRIVE
SPARTA, NC 2B675 CONOVER, NC 2861 3
336.406.0906 826.302.3437
CHRIS. [e-mail] [e-mail]

Oaot W AT l 9�
y -
O
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑x Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
x❑ Yes []No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑K 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes X❑ No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑Yes x❑ No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑x Yes ❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below.
❑ Yes ❑x No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑x No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Planter's Walk
2b.
County:
Davidson
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Thomasville
2d. Subdivision name:
Planter's Walk
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
n/a
3.
Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Clayton Properties Group, Inc. DBA Shugart Homes
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
2364 147
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Greg Garrett
3d. Street address:
221 Jonestown Road
3e.
City, state, zip:
Winston-Salem, NC 27104
3f.
Telephone no.:
336.231.6764
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
4e.
City, state, zip:
4f.
Telephone no.:
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Perry Isner
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Wetlands & Waters, Inc.
5c.
Street address:
328 East Broad Street, Suite D
5d. City, state, zip:
Statesville, NC 28677
5e.
Telephone no.:
704.773.4239
5f.
Fax no.:
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1631100000038
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.93647 Longitude:-80.06488
1 c.
Property size:
+/- 100 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Kennedy Mill Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c.
River basin:
Yadkin Pee -Dee
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Existing on site conditions consists of the partially built -out Planter's Walk subdivision, including infrastructure, as well as wooded, vacant land.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to complete connectivity of Branch Crossing Drive from Planter's Walk Drive to Joe Moore Road. This minor
collector road runs through the Planter's Walk subdivision and will serve as an alternate means of transportation through this region.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Typical construction equipment will be used, including but not limited to excavator, pan, dump truck, bulldozer, etc. Project will be constructed under
an approved sediment and erosion control plan.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases)in the past?
Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d.
If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Action ID#: 2006 40393 229
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑X Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Initial phase, including one roadway crossing, is mostly complete. Requested impacts are necessary to complete connectivity of Branch Crossing
Drive.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑x Wetlands x❑ Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Culvert
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.046
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.046
2h. Comments:
Additional 0.096 acres of previously authorized impacts (exhibit attached) proposed at 1:1 mitigation.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Riprap
UT Kennedy Mill Creek
INT
Corps
3
4
S2 P
Culvert
UT Kennedy Mill Creek
INT
Corps
3
30
S3 P
Culvert
UT Kennedy Mill Creek
INT
Corps
3
47
S4 P
Riprap
UT Kennedy Mill Creek
INT
Corps
3
20
S5 P
Culvert
UT Kennedy Mill Creek
PER
Corps
4
29
S6 P
Riprap
UT Kennedy Mill Creek
PER
Corps
4
17
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
147
3i. Comments:
Additional 52 LF of previously authorized impacts (exhibit attached) proposed at 1:1 mitigation.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B 1
Yes/No
B2
Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5
Yes/No
B6
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Project has been carefully designed to minimize impacts to the maximum extent practicable. Culverts will utilize large headwalls in order to minimize
stream disturbance. Crossing locations have been chosen at locations to avoid impacts to wetlands and utilize an existing, small concrete culvert at
crossing S-1. No other impacts to regulated features are associated with this project.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Project will be constructed under an approved sediment and erosion control plan. Temporary impacts for construction of culvert crossings (cofferdam
and pump -around) will be placed within area of rip rap aprons in order to minimize disturbance.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
Yes No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑x No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
22 %
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑x No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
Project meets low density requirements, and includes discharge of stormwater through 100' vegetated swales with 3:1 side slopes and 2% slopes.
Bottom widths vary between 3'-12' dependent upon the discharge quantity in order to keep velocities below 4 feet per second. See attached detail
for
further information.
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes
❑x No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes
❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑Yes
❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes
No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑Yes
No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes
No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance
with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Project will run sanitary sewer from each lot through roadways in order to minimize impacts. Project will utilize and tie into existing sanitary sewer
main along southern boundary of site.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑x No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
NC Natural Heritage Program database.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑x No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑x No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NC SHPO ArcGIS.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑x No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Be. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Davidson County GIS/ FEMA ArcGIS
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

FA
High Point
411-
Site
Eiwin Heights
L
c,
14'
Lv Bing
ADD?50N.I) CS7EEK
-HEST 07
WYMUGA7E
B4,$RrO,'1 CARS
PLAN7-z-- K
P"'rror
V
WETLANDS
�4faWATERS
Vicinity Map
'Erlgllsh Rd
-n
Z- 77
z
-110 Q
LA
H;jsty SLnool Rd Ha
LC
J�
2500 feet �too M
2 HERE
Project Name: Planter's Walk
Owner/ Developer: Shugart Management, Inc.
City/County: Thomasville / Davidson
Tax PIN(s): 1631100000038
Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Lat: 35.93647 Long- -80.06488 graphic 10/26/17

Potentially Jurisdictional
Water of the US
Tributary 6
-55 LF
Potentially Jurisdictional
Water of the US
Tributary 5
-815 LF
Potentially Jurisdictional
Water of the US
Tributary 4
-1350 LF
Project
Boundary
Potentially Jurisdictional
Water of the US
Wetland 2 f
-0.20 acres
Potentially Jurisdictional
Water of the US
Tributary 2
-1190 LF
Potentially Jurisdictional + Potentially Jurisdictional
Water of the US / Water of the US
Wetland 3 L I 1 Tributary 1
-0.08 acres Potentially Jurisdictional -240 LF
Water of the US
Wetland 1
�0.24 acres
Potentially Jurisdictional
Water of the US
Tributary 3
-375 LF
'Wetland Sketch provided for illustrative purposes for preliminary planning use only. Not intended
to be relied upon for exact location, dimensions, or orientation. All findings and assessments made
by wetland consultants regarding limits of jurisdiction or permitting requirements are subject to
verification by the US Army Corps of Engineers and other appropriate state and local authorities.
t N
200 ft
Project Name: Planter's Walk
Owner / Developer: Shugart Management, Inc.
ATERS
City/County: Thomasville / Davidson
46,w�TLANDS
Tax PIN(s): 1631100000038
Coordinates: Scale: Originial Date: 10/26/17
Fig 1: Approx. Depiction of Waters and Wetlands Lat. 35.93647 Long: -80.06488 graphic Revised Date: 02/01/18

r--------—I a
:
k7,1.4
f°
l j
W � ;
_ � 1
Y�
�p a
w
' I 1
u.
r 7
:
P.
r Y
I inch i; l Icct
Project Name: Planter's Walk
Owner / Developer: Shugart Management, Inc.
WETLANDS City/County:
� 48&"
WATERS Thomasville / Davidson
Tax PIN(s). 1631100000038
Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Figure 2: County GIS Lat: 35.93647 Lona:-80.06488 graphic 10/26/17

j. f � \k
.! ` �i•��� L
r. },tom.
�
/"L�►� /'
r

r l t.
It
EnD
PnB
PnD
PnD
`*
P ,
n y ,
i` C) PnE j 'O X c� u c Pnf, PnE
c 4
T
1 t A PrE E SfB t
F n
k- P��C�
Q P iD r r F PnE Prst3 �'t t' ., .
S#8
Pn8 Pei
"at'
a r s :
J Aitjt� r ",
_ KL U - ct) _- -- Ch EnH StB
Ch Y ,
a'iter PnE PnE PnB P -E
PF
;3 EnD t
✓ cF Pi PnB ao PnE ' H
nE PnD 1 a f' C3
Cz
PnC) Qj Pnf COD 1
' EIt�
t ,
PrIB t
Project Name: Planter's Walk
owner / Developer: Shugart Management, Inc.
WETLANDS Owner
Thomasville /Davidson
�& WATERS Tax PIN(s). 1631100000038
Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Figure 4: Soil Survey t_at: graphic 10/26/17
g Y 35.93647 Long:-80.06488

4yWETLANDS
a WATERS
Figure 5: National Wetland Inventory Map
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Project Name: Planter's Walk
owner / Developer: Shugart Management, Inc.
City/County: Thomasville / Davidson
Tax PiN(s): 1631100000038
Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Lat: 35.93647 Long: 80.06488 graphic
10/26/17

NC Surface Water Classification
Rd
Surface Water Classifications:
12-119-7-2
Na""
Kennedy Mill Creek
De
From source to Rich
Fork
Cl
C
Date ct Cia , ,
August 31, 1974
Rive; Ba<,n
Yadkin Pee -Dee
What do -ea thr, t_
;::>; More info
n ern,
2014 Integrated
Report Overall Category
AUir
12-119-7-2
r am N:., -:
Kennedy Mill Creek
Descrlpth e
From source to Rich Fork
Overall
No Data
ena'i
5.79
tlnits.
FW Miles
YAD
Y ma
Surface Water Classifications
DWR 2014 IR Overall Cat. (Zoom in for faster results)
- No Data
rETLANDS, W
& WATERS
Figure 6: Stream Classification
1:18,056
0 0.175 0.35 0.7 mi
0 0.35 0.7 1.4 km
Project Name: Planter's Walk
Owner / Developer: Shugart Management, Inc.
City/County: Thomasville / Davidson
Tax PIN(s): 1631100000038
Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Lat: 35.93647 Long: -80.06488 graphic 10/26/17

FEMA's National Flood Hazard Layer (Official)
NFHL (click to expand) '
LOMRs
Effective
LOMAs
9
FIRM Panels
Q
Cross -Sections
Limit of Moderate Wave
Action
e..
Flood Hazard Boundaries
Limit Lines
SFHA / Flood Zone
Boundary
Other Boundaries
Flood Hazard Zones
■ 1% Annual Chance
Flood Hazard
Regulatory Floodway
Special Floodway
Area of
Undetermined Flood
Hazard
® 0.2% Annual Chance
Flood Hazard
WETLANDS
k T& WATERS
Figure 7: FEMA Floodplain
Project Name:
Owner / Developer:
City /County:
Tax PIN(s):
Coordinates:
Lat. 35.93647 Lo
Planter's Walk
Shugart Management, Inc.
Thomasville / Davidson
1631100000038
Scale: Date:
-80.06488 graphic
10/26/17
0.2mi

JOE MOORE RD I
E-, -i
CT S-2
ED 0 It QD
ED
f (3) 0 ED 0 ID aD
Ell (p
DE L
T M aD (b 0 j
tyj
6D
T
T (ID 4) 0
QD
C,
_j
VI --------
7
Yip �r' r
%
ry
r 01 _7
ry c.j
L
r'J r'j, r.,'
rj)
r�
ry
ry
j
r
ry i
r
c'j r.j
lai j
ry f Eli
j
f P01-j r-d
ry
If
IMPACT MAP
FOR
PLANTER'S WALK
DEVELOPED BY
SHUGART MANAGEMENT
THOMASVILLE TOWNSHIP
CITY OF HIGH POINT
DAVIDSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
OCTOBER, 2017
JOB No. 2017060
DEVELOPER /OWNER-
SHUGART MANAGEMENT
221 JONESTOWN ROAD
WINSTON SALEM. NC 27104
[phone]
300' 0 300' 600'
SCALE: 1 300'

IMPACT Sl-S4
FOR
PLANTER'S WALK
DEVELOPED BY
SHUGART MANAGEMENT
THOMASVILLE TOWNSHIP
CITY OF HIGH POINT
DAVIDSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
OCTOBER, 2017
JOB No. 2017060
40' 30' 20' 10' 0 40' 80'
SCALE: 1"=40'
DEVELOPER/OWNER:
SHUGART MANAGEMENT
221 JONESTOWN ROAD
WINSTON SALEM, NC 27104
[phone]
RQP4PE�
G�ARIMG
RIP -RAP
4 PIP---RA2
PAD
(TYP.)
- APRON (TYP.)
'�CACEDJ
. FLUSH
. ........
SILT,\FEN(;E
_PROPOSED
HE-ADWAtE
4
RC
kip
3--/ S 4: '-16' 7
0S
S1 /S2:--34--CF
1RO
2 LF
ell
PCP
V IBUR
kOPOSED
HEADWALL
. ..........
tI Nff TS OF7 ---
DISTURBANgE
..........
(TYP.),
-ENO-QE, E-XI-STIM--
ROADWAY
IN
. . . . . ........ .

IMPACT S5/S6 & W- >
FOR
PLANTER'S WALK
DEVELOPED BY
SHUGART MANAGEMENT DEVELOPER/OWNER:
THOMASVILLE TOWNSHIP SHUGART MANAGEMENT
CITY OF HIGH POINT 221 JONESTOWN ROAD
DAVIDSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA WINSTON SALEM, NC 27104
[phone]
OCTOBER, 2017
JOB No. 2017060
40' 30' 20' 10' 0 40' 80'
SCALE: 1 "=40'
LIMITS OF-
\ DISTURBANCE r
$5/S6: 46v LF v V -
r
PROI;IOSE9 ' w
RIP-f�,A1'
�- - 1 _
IsLACED FLySH� —
PRO.EQSEDJ r I
_ HEADWALL �9
- 5'
FES 2-1 BUR
\ \ NI
00 L _—PROP6SED.. � —
_._. -HEADWALL -_
10
n,.
00
N f

r1:In: 494M■

SWALE #1
LENGTH = 100'
WIDTH = 3'
SIDE SLOPES 3:1
' \\L4,T-SLOPE = 2%
-4.9 CES
2;8 FPS-
FES 2-1
4
t
t
F 3-Y
SWALE J2
LENGTH 1= 100"
WIDTH - 6'
SIDE SLOPES r3:1
LAT. SLOPE 7 2%
Q = 22 CFS
VEt�= 4,0'FPS./
cp
DISCHARGE DETAILS
FOR
PLANTER'S WALK
DEVELOPED BY
SHUGART MANAGEMENT
THOMASVILLE TOWNSHIP
CITY OF HIGH POINT
DAVIDSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
OCTOBER, 2017
JOB No. 2017060
DEVELOPER/OWNER:
SHUGART MANAGEMENT
221 JONESTO*4 ROAD
WINSTON SALEM, NC 27104
[phone]
40' 30' 20' 10' 0 40' 80,
SCALE: 1"=40'
Ll-'6OS -Z
---------- -------
FES 1,11 -1
SWALE
LENGTH = 100'
WIDTH = 12'
S DE SLOPES 3: 1
LA�. SLOPE = 2%
Q----33 CFS
3.9 'FPS/

OLD IMPACTS W - 9 & S- 2
FOR
PLANTER'S WALK
DEVELOPED BY
SHUGART MANAGEMENT DEVELOPER/OWNER:
THOMASVILLE TOWNSHIP SHUGART MANAGEMENT
CITY OF HIGH POINT 221 JONESTOWN ROAD
DAVIDSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA WINSTON SALEM, NC 27104
_. _ [phone]
AUGUST, 2006
JOB No. 2004088
40' 30' 20' 10' 0 40' 80'
SCALE: 1 "=40'
y1''�`�
SWIF
ORION 11*49
MEN
-.-.D.
`l

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Greg Garrett
Clayton Properties Group, Inc
221 Jonestown Road
Winston-Salem, NC 27104
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
October21, 2019
Expiration of Acceptance: 4/21/2020
Project: Planter's Walk County: Davidson
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Location Impact Type 1 Impact Quantity
__(8-digit HUC)
Yadkin 03040103 Riparian Wetland 0.142
Yadkin 03040103 1 Warm Stream 199
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
cc: Perry Isner, agent
Sincerely,
Jam s. Stanfill
Asse anagement Supervisor
4:5:,AD_1 E_
t�w+a FnYeaoraN my�
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality f Division of W9ation Services
217 W. Jones Street I ib52 Mail Service Center I kaleigfr, North Carolina 2P649-1652
919.707.6976

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
p►ccomaames user manual version c.i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Planter's Walk 2. Date of evaluation: 10/16/19
3. Applicant/owner name: Shugart 4. Assessor name/organization: P. Isner, W&W, Inc.
5. County: Davidson 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Kennedy Mill Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.93682-80.06567
Trib 4 (Impact S1-
9. Site number (show on attached map): S4) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 125
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1.5 [-]Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? [-]Yes (]No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
15. NC SAM Zone:
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (
17. Watershed size:
❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
❑Ah ®B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
®Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 miz)
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
El Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑LAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
®A ®A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
Si Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
N
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F E
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
w m
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
Y t
01
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
t12
M
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1 la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes [:]No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
® ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ []Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ []Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ []Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ®Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ®A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
❑A ®A ❑A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
®B ❑B ®B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ®A Mature forest
®B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
®A ®A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. []No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Planter's Walk
Stream Category Pbl
Date of Assessment 10/16/19
Assessor Name/Organization P. Isner, W&W, Inc.
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM
HIGH

P
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Govemor Roy Cooper
November 20, 2017
Perry Isner
Wetlands & Waters, Inc.
2712 Minden Rd.
Pleasant Garden, NC 27313
RE: Planter's Walk
Dear Perry Isner:
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
NCNHDE-4733
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural
heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have
been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may
update our records.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been
documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that
these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists and is
included for reference. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed area within a one -mile radius of the
project area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project
review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.
Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the
NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP
data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature
Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) easement,
or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919.707.8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
MAILING ADDRESS: Telephone: [phone]D7 LOCATION_
1651 Mail Service Center www.ncnhp.org 121 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 Raleigh, NC 27603

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Planter's Walk
November 20, 2017
NCNHDE-4733
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
Group Observation Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank
Date Rank
Mammal 34673 Myotis septentrionalis Northern Long-eared Bat 2001-08-28 E 5-Very T-4(d) Significantly G1 G2 S2
Low Rare
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httos://ncnhde.natureserve org/content/hellp. Data query generated on November 20, 2017; source: NCNHP, 04 October 2017. Please resubmit
your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2of3

N
W+G
S
November 20, 2017
Project Boundary
❑ Buffered Project Boundary
NCNHDE-4733: Planter's Walk
Page 3 of 3
1:25,293
0 02 04 0.8 mi
0 0.325 0.65 1.3 km
SaacesEsri. HERE. DeLorme. Int—ip increment P Corp.. GESCO. USGS,
FAO. NIPS. NRCAN, GecBase, IGN, Kadaster NIL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan,
METI, Esn China (Hong Kong), smsstopo, Mapmylnda. £ OpenStreetMap
contributors, and the GIS User Community

®North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
30 January 2018
Mr. Perry Isner
Wetlands & Waters, Inc.
4108 LB Propst Drive
Conover, North Carolina 28613
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification Application for the Planter's Walk Residential Development,
Thomasville, Davidson County. DEQ Project No. 20171590.
Dear Mr. Isner,
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject
information. Comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as
amended) and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended;
16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
On behalf of Shugart Management, Inc., Wetlands & Waters, Inc. has submitted an Pre -Construction
Notification application for Planter's Walk Residential Development located at Paul Pope Road and east
of Joe Moore Road in Thomasville, Davidson County, North Carolina (N.C.). Approximately 30 acres of
forest will be cleared for the second phase of the project. Construction of culverts for crossing two
unnamed tributaries of Kennedy Mill Creek will result in permanent impacts to 238 linear feet of streams,
which does not include impacts from the first phase of the project. Kennedy Mill Creek in the Yadkin —
Pee Dee River basin is classified as a Class C stream by the N.C. Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR).
We do not have records of federal or state -protected species adjacent to or within the site. The lack of
records from the site does not imply or confirm the absence of federal or state -listed species or state
Species of Greatest Conservation Need listed in the 2015 State Wildlife Action Plan
(http://www.ncwildlife.org/plan). An on -site survey is the only definitive means to determine if the
proposed project would impact rare, threatened, or endangered species.
We are concerned with the amount of impacts to the unnamed tributaries to Kennedy Mill Creek. We
offer the following recommendations to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources.
1. Maintain a minimum 100-foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer along perennial streams, and a
minimum 50-foot buffer along intermittent streams and wetlands. Maintaining undisturbed,
forested buffers along these areas will minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife
resources, water quality, and aquatic habitat both within and downstream of the project area.
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Page 2
30 January 2018
Planter's Walk Development
Davidson County
Also, wide riparian buffers are helpful in maintaining stability of stream banks and for treatment
of pollutants associated with urban stormwater.
2. Consider avoiding or further minimizing the amount of impacts to the streams. Use bridges for
all permanent roadway crossings of streams and associated wetlands to eliminate the need to fill
and culvert, where practicable. If culverts must be used, the culvert should be designed to allow
aquatic life passage.
3. Limit impervious surface to less than 10% or use stormwater control measures to mimic the
hydrograph consistent with an impervious coverage of less than 10%. An increase in impervious
surfaces from development alters the hydrology of a watershed and affects water quality. With
reduced infiltration, runoff rates increase and cause stream levels to increase more quickly and
result in more frequent flood events. Such increased flood frequency can worsen streambank
erosion, particularly if riparian conditions are poor. Efforts to reduce the amount of
imperviousness and control stormwater are important to reduce the hydrologic impacts of
increased development and the effects on aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat.
4. Use non-invasive native species and Low Impact Development (LID) technology in landscaping.
Using LID technology in landscaping will not only help maintain the predevelopment hydrologic
regime, but also enhance the aesthetic and habitat value of the site. LID techniques include
permeable pavement and bioretention areas that can collect stormwater from driveways and
parking areas. Additional alternatives include narrower roads, swales versus curbs/gutters and
permeable surfaces such as turf stone, brick, and cobblestone. Compared to conventional
developments, implementing appropriate LID techniques can be more cost-effective, provide
space -saving advantages, reduce runoff, and protect water quality (Roseen et al. 2011). Also,
NCWRC's Green Growth Toolbox provides information on nature -friendly planning
(htip://www.ncwildl ife.org/Conserving/Programs/GreenGrowthToolbox.aspx).
We recommend using green construction techniques to improve water, waste, and energy
efficiency. The following five techniques have the greatest impact on sustainable building:
prefabricating materials in controlled environments, construction waste management, lean
manufacturing to reduce energy, and environmentally -friendly material selection
(https://www.forconstr-uctioLipros.com/business/article/I 2068798/five-techniques-for-sustainable-
building-construction).
6. Re -seed disturbed areas with native seed mixtures or plants that are beneficial to wildlife. Using
native species instead of ornamentals should reduce the need for water, fertilizers and pesticides.
In open areas, consider planting native, wildflower seed mixes that will create pollinator habitat
within the project boundary. A list of wildlife -friendly, native plants is available upon request.
Avoid using invasive, non-native plants (i.e., lespedeza, Bermudagrass, or tall fescue) in seed
mixtures or landscaping plants htip://www.ncwildflower.org/plant galleries/invasives_list).
7. Sediment and erosion control measures should use advanced methods and installed prior to any
land -disturbing activity. The use of biodegradable and wildlife -friendly sediment and erosion
control devices is strongly recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products should
have loose -weave netting that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the
vertical and horizontal twines. Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh
should be avoided as it impedes the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. Excessive silt and
sediment loads can have detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of
spawning habitat, suffocation of eggs, and clogging of gills.

Page 3
30 January 2018
Planter's Walk Development
Davidson County
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input for this project. For further information or free technical
guidance from the NCWRC, please call [phone] or email olivia.munzer(cincwildlife.org.
Sincerely,
Olivia Munzer
Western Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Literature Cited
Roseen, R. M., T. V. Janeski, J. J. Houle, M. H. Simpson, and J. Gunderson. 2011. Forging the Link:
Linking the Economic Benefits of Low Impact Development and Community Decisions.
University of New Hampshire Stormwater Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, and
Antioch University New England.
ec: Sue Homewood, NCDWR
Bryan Roden -Reynolds, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Byron Hamstead, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Brian Shugart, Shugart Management, Inc.

DIRECTION :35.115041°N ACCURACY 1.35 mi DIRECTION 35.93599°N ACCURACY 98 ft
35 deg(T) 080.05692°W DATUM WGS84 58 deg(T) 080.06842°W DATUM WGS84
01
s' 0
�4 � � • „� r It s � � 4
1
. tilt +�.. .. • a 1+�
,y.
a. v
r �
`�:e
, l\ 5
Shugart, 1/31/13, Shugart, Tributary End
Planters Walk Tributary End 10:43:01 AM Planters Walk (below pool / 11:06:52 AM
wetlands below
DIRECTION 35.93596°N ACCURACY 33 ft DIRECTION 35.935811N., ACCURACY 33 ft
53 deg(T) 080.06846"W DATUM WGS84 5 deg(T) 080.06875'W DATUM WGS84
Fume
r` �r
a .s
t
G+1 a ,gyp �'.1 � � +j� • 1
Shug
art, , 1/31/18,
Shugart, Tributary End 1/31/18, g
(below pool ! WL OF. Impact W1
Planters Walk _y,__�_ �_,_..1 11:07:02 AM -Planters Walk 11:27:5$ AM '

DIRECTION 35.93586°N ACCURACY 33 ft
186 deg(T) 080.06868°W DATUM WGS84
ij
�M-10
Ap.
. ,
+ s
♦,.-(, r i'�i �-..y ..♦ - i - .�a%
50
AP
/gam ,
wo
,r �--. � • , - . �� -�
K .�- >
40
jt
.r.7ri:7!.%) �!; 'N �i.-•
y L �• .
Shugart, Planters WL DF. Impact W1 1/31/18, 11:28:20 AM
Walk

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Planter's Walk City/County: Thomasville / Davidson Sampling Date: 01/31/18
Applicant/Owner: Shugart State: NC Sampling Point: DF-1
Investigator(s): P. Isner, T. Bandy Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.93581 Long:-80.06875 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2)
—Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3)
X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131)
—Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (133)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_Iron Deposits (135)
_Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches): 3
Saturation Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches): 6
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DF-1
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species? Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Platanus occidentalis
15
Yes FACW
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
5 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata:
6 (B)
5•
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
83.3% (A/B)
15
=Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
8
20% of total cover:
3
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
1. Acer rubrum
5
Yes
FAC
FACW species 15 x 2 = 30
2. Carpinus caroliniana
5
Yes
FAC
FAC species 30 x 3 = 90
3. Liquidambar styraciflua
5
Yes
FAC
FACU species 7 x 4 = 28
4.
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5.
Column Totals: 52 (A) 148 (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.85
15
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
8
20% of total cover:
3
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
2
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3
4.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
6,
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1. Microstegium vimineum
15
Yes
FAC
2. Polystichum acrostichoides
2
No
FACU
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4.
5,
Shrub - Woody Plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
8.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody plants,
9
except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
m) in height.
10.
11
Woody Vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
17
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
9
20% of total cover:
4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Lonicera japonica 5 Yes FACU
2.
3.
4.
5' Hydrophytic
5 =Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 3 20% of total cover: 1 Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DF-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' LocZ
Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 4/2 100
Loamy/Clayey
1-12 10YR 6/2 85
7.5YR 5/6 10 C M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
5YR 5/8 5 C PL
Prominent redox concentrations
12-20 10YR 7/1 90
5YR 5/8 10 C PL
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (Al)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) _2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_Stratified
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_
Below Dark Surface (A11)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Depleted
Dark Surface (Al2)
? Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
—Thick
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix (S6)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_Stripped
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,
147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Planters Walk City/County: Thomasville / Davidson Sampling Date: 01/31/18
Applicant/Owner: Shugart State: NC Sampling Point: DF-2
Investigator(s): P. Isner, T. Bandy Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.93575 Long:-80.06871 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (614)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ High Water Table (A2)
—Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_Saturation (A3)
_Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (B1)
X Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (62)
—Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
—Crayfish Burrows (C8)
—Drift Deposits (133)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
—Algal Mat or Crust (134)
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches): 10
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DF-2
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
15
Yes
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
15
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata:
7 (B)
5•
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
42.9% (A/B)
30
=Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
6
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
1. Acerrubrum
10
Yes
FAC
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
2. Carpinus caroliniana
5
Yes
FAC
FAC species 30 x 3 = 90
3. Ilex opaca
5
Yes
FACU
FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
4.
UPL species 10 x 5 = 50
5.
Column Totals: 65 (A) 240 (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.69
20
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1. Elaeagnus umbellata
10
Yes
UPL
-3 Prevalence Index is :53.0'
2
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3
4.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5•
' Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
6.
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10
=Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover:
5
20% of total cover:
2
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1 Polystichum acrostichoides
5
Yes
FACU
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
it.
5 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
3 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
f
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody Plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody plants,
except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
m) in height.
Woody Vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DF-2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 4/2 100
Loamy/Clayey
2-8 10YR 4/4 70
7.5YR 5/2 20 D M
Loamy/Clayey
10YR 5/6 10 RM PL/M
8-20 10YR 5/6 60
7.5YR 5/3 40 D M
Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) —Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (1721)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (177)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,
147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0